So I got a PCN a while back and decided to challenge it and sent back a representation against it. I assumed they would just reject it and was expecting a notice back to that effect, but it has been nearly three months since I sent that back and I haven't heard anything. The PCN was in a hire car and reissuing the ticket in my name took them ages so I assumed they would be slow too but even so I was starting to get worried and was going to try contact them but of course they have no phone number.

Anyway today I received a "Charge Certificate" with a 50% uplift on the original amount and no mention of ways to challenge. I was planning on taking this to a tribunal to challenge but what can I do now? I assume they will say they did send out a notice of rejection but I never received anything.

I called up the tribunals today to see if they could shed any light, they didn't really seem to know. After some prompting they said the local authority can choose whether to issue a new notice of rejection or use the original one and maybe I should have used a different appeal code. The authority didn't give a new code however, they simply said appeal using the code on the copy of the original notice of rejection (see actual text above). Has anyone gone through this before, does this all sound right? They have had the appeal for over a week now and heard nothing so a bit worried that the council ought to have given me a new code and I won't even get a hearing because the appeal is being made months late when viewed according to the original NoR that I never received.

Ah right sorry I misunderstood your question. I made the submission to the tribunal online and it was whilst going through that submission that there was a notification saying it was out of time and I would have to submit a reason for why I am making an out of time submission and this would need to be considered by an adjudicator before going to hearing. When I called the tribunal up they also said about it being out of time. I haven't had anything through the post from them though nor anything other than a confirmation of the appeal submission via email. I contacted the authority asking them to confirm the applicable appeal code I should be using but of course they are being slow on that, I'll try contact the tribunal via email see if they can direct it to someone more knowledgable.

Ah right sorry I misunderstood your question. I made the submission to the tribunal online and it was whilst going through that submission that there was a notification saying it was out of time and I would have to submit a reason for why I am making an out of time submission and this would need to be considered by an adjudicator before going to hearing. When I called the tribunal up they also said about it being out of time. I haven't had anything through the post from them though nor anything other than a confirmation of the appeal submission via email. I contacted the authority asking them to confirm the applicable appeal code I should be using but of course they are being slow on that, I'll try contact the tribunal via email see if they can direct it to someone more knowledgable.

Tell the tribunal the reason for the late appeal. You did not receive the NOR made a stat dec the TEC revoked CC and ofr. The authority then sent you a copy of the NOR and told you to appeal or pay

So, I finally got a response back from London Tribunals, they accepted the out of time appeal and I have a date for next Tuesday for the hearing. Took them 3 weeks to decide to allow the appeal.

Today I got a huge 64 page evidence pack through the post from the authority.

One thing I was curious about was were you find all the prior cases to refer to? Is that just from the key cases on the London Tribunals site or is it possible to see records of all hearings somewhere?

I found the proper past case search. Interestingly I see that there was a successful appeal recently for the same contravention in the same location and on the same ground I made of inadequate signs when making a left turn (case ref 2180328857). Is it too late to reference that?

They gave me the hearing date a few weeks ago, but I only just received the evidence pack. I agree the summary doesn't give any real defence on my second and third grounds, basically they seem to be saying the PCN says that so it's correct. Seems they have an appeal pack ready to go for this particular location as a lot of the 'evidence' included isn't relevant to my case.

When did you tell us this? We cannot see because you've redacted the address. But you have a copy of the NOR, so what's the problem with this?

Frankly, s*d the contravention, I want to drill down into this revelation. How could this address be wrong, but not the CC and OfR? And if they addressed these to a different address, then who had custody of the brain cell that day and forgot to twig that if this was not the address to which the NOR was sent then everything else was procedural garbage!

HCA is right if they acknowledge sending the NOR to the wrong address they did not legally serve it so game over, (although there is no time frame for doing so)

They are idiots this is a LLAA 2003 PCN the time allowed for discount is 14 days not 21 as they maintain. And yes the allowed time is 28 days from date of notice. BUT the tell you on the PCN its date of service.. This must be prejudicial as their summery confirms they work to a date two days at least before that

When did you tell us this? We cannot see because you've redacted the address. But you have a copy of the NOR, so what's the problem with this?

Frankly, s*d the contravention, I want to drill down into this revelation. How could this address be wrong, but not the CC and OfR? And if they addressed these to a different address, then who had custody of the brain cell that day and forgot to twig that if this was not the address to which the NOR was sent then everything else was procedural garbage!

Well basically I live in a large block of flats and they left off my apartment number from the address so it was no wonder the NoR never reached me. The address they were sending the other documents to did have the apartment number, although even that was somewhat wierd and not consistent with what the hire company gave to them.

I did notice this inaccuracy in the address when they sent a copy of the NoR after getting the charge recinded, I thought at this stage it didn't matter since the original documents had reached me that's why I hadn't brought it up.

HCA is right if they acknowledge sending the NOR to the wrong address they did not legally serve it so game over, (although there is no time frame for doing so)

They are idiots this is a LLAA 2003 PCN the time allowed for discount is 14 days not 21 as they maintain. And yes the allowed time is 28 days from date of notice. BUT the tell you on the PCN its date of service.. This must be prejudicial as their summery confirms they work to a date two days at least before that

Please post a copy of your representation and the NoR

The NoR is below. All documents except the NoR were sent addressed as

My NameApartment BlockApartment NumberLondonPostcode

NoR was addressed as

My NameApartment BlockLondonPostcode

Which representations did you want to see? The ones submitted to the tribunal or the one sent to the council before the NoR? The council one I just mentioned the signage and market stall, it was only in the tribunal evidence that I added the other two points about the PCN.

To the council I simply said: "The sign at the entrance to Binfield Road was not visible from the angle of approach I took. There was a market stall obscuring the sign from my view, this is clearly visible in the CCTV video provided."

What I was thinking of saying in response to the council's summary was that they are relying mainly on the advance warning signs, which on their own are not sufficient especially given that this road does allow certain permit holders to enter which can only be determined from the sign at the entrance. I maintain that the sign at the entrance is not sufficiently visible, there has been a case just last week granted on this basis alone.

As for the other two grounds, the council appears to be just plain wrong, I spelt out the full detail of the relevant parts of the act with help from you guys on here and how their PCN wasn't adhering to that and they don't demonstrate compliance.